Alright, I thought this was a rather bizarre ending to a rather bizarre book. I don't understand what exactly Virginia Woolf is trying to accomplish with this final page/chapter. It makes it look as though Mrs. Flanders doesn't really care about Jacob, and it raises in my mind a few questions as to how he died. I know Mrs. Flanders said on page 137 that her sons were off fighting the war, implying that Jacob might have been recruited to fight. However, a bit earlier she's writing a letter to Archer that gives no suggestion of that. Did we skip time periods in the course of a couple paragraphs? That seems to be the only logical answer, as the other one would be that he just disappeared.
In the final line, Mrs. Flanders holds out an old pair of Jacob's shoes and asks what to do with them. I certainly hope that some time has past since they found out about his death, otherwise that would make her an extremely callous individual. Bonamy seems to be more upset than Jacob's own mother. That doesn't make sense to me because I always thought that Mrs. Flanders really cared about Jacob, despite the fact that Archer was the absolute favorite. I found that part of the ending to be rather dissatisfying.
Does anyone have further thoughts on the ending of the book? Did you like the ending or not?- NVa-c Jan 26, 2008
Actually, I thought the last line was rather poignant. I think that you took the word "exclamation" to mean that she was surprised or amused. Maybe the exclamation was more of despair, the text does not really say. Nevertheless, I think the significance of her statement, "What am I to do with these, Mr. Bonamy?" (138) was more of a symbolic qestion. The question is more one of "How are we going to cope with him being gone?" That is, "How are we going to fill his shoes now?" He was a significant part of both of their lives, and they both loved him. But for Bonamy, the pain is a little more exposed. Mrs. Flanders has already learned to cope without him.
Remember the passage at the beginning of Chapter 8: "...and come back, come back, come back to me." She has had to cope with him neglecting her for years. Now that he is dead, she will have him neglect her permanently. But at the same time, nobody else has him either. We know that "the heart was torn by the little creak, the sudden stir." (70). If she is less upset than Bonamy, it would only be because those women that stole him away can't have him anymore. But I am not even sure the book says that. - TRu-c Jan 27, 2008
I'm caught in the middle with this one. When I first read chapter 14, I had the same initial reaction as NVa. I thought that is seemed like Mrs. Flanders didn't care about the death of her son like Mr. Bonamy did. I was a little frustrated with her. Like NVa said, Archer did seem to be the obvious favorite of Mrs. Flanders but I expected a little bit more emotion from her over the death of Jacob.
I read this chapter over a couple of times and after a while I realized that Mrs. Flanders was upset, but like TRu pointed out, Jacob wasn't always there for Mrs. Flanders. So once she learned of his death, while it was probably upsetting for her, it's not like they had the best relationship. I think that she felt guilty about his death because now there was no way to repair what was left of their relationship. It didn't seem like she was sad but I think that she just had a different sadness than that of Mr. Bonamy. - kfr-c Jan 27, 2008
Might I add my belief that Betty Flanders loved Jacob fully as much as any mother ever loved a son? Yes, she probably would have had feelings about the women Jacob knew, but he was still her son ... come back to me, come back to me, come back to me ... I kind of agree with Tim in that it seems she's showing a bit of the very British stiff upper lip at this moment. She has dealt with the immediate shock .. and now it's time to deal with setting things in order again. - brtom
After listening to Brother Tom's reading of this chapter on the podcast, I got a more solid understanding of what was going on. It made more clear the despair of his death, especially with the crying out of Jacob and the manner in which he read Mrs. Flanders's statements.
There were some other symbolic things I heard more clearly after listening to it. First, I became more aware of the part with the ram's skull. Is that supposed to be related the jawless sheep's skull in Chapter 1? That reference kind of brings the book full circle if they are indeed connected. The other thing I noticed more was the word "omnibuses." That word was used a lot over the course of the book. Why were the omnibuses so important that they were even included in the conclusion? Any thoughts?- NVa-c
I agree with TRu in that when I read this last chapter, the final line really stuck out for me. It is a rather bizarre end, but the whole book is rather strange, and I suppose it would only be fitting. Chapter 14 has an air of vagueness mixed with significance; Bonamy and Mrs. Flanders are dealing with their pain in different ways, and each action in this chapter speaks loudly. Woolf did not waste any words in this chapter, and each part holds an important aspect of the ending. For instance, their is an obscurity in Bonamy's response; he treats it as if Jacob has disappeared. He comments on how Jacob had left without getting his affairs in order, and he calls out the window as if he still believes he's out there somewhere. Then the narrator comes in, talking about Jacob's room and the empty, awkwardness of it now that Jacob is no longer occupying it. I did not get the feeling that Mrs. Flanders didn't feel upset about her son's death or disappearance; it seemed like she was just accepting that it was over. Long ago she accepted her lack of influence in his life and now she is finally giving up trying to get him back; she's realized that all is gone. - dru-c Jan 28, 2008
I thought that the ending of this novel was quite interesting as well. I didn't expect the last chapter to be so short, nor to examine the contents of what was Jacob's room. I agree that it sounded as if Bonamy had very little expression about Jacob's death, and when he did show a bit of emotion, it was, as dru said... as if he disappeared. We, again, are confronted with the idea of someone softly yelling crying out for Jacob with the lonesome attitude. It adds a sad note to the end of the book, but much more than sad. It makes it sounds as though the characters are drowning in grief and sorrow for the loss of a young man whom everyone seemed to get along with. I also thought that the last couple sentences about Jacob's shoes were odd. I think that it would have been much more theatrical and meaningful to end the novel with Bonamy screaming out the window for Jacob and Mrs. Flanders exclaiming how confusing everything is. Any thoughts? - bzw-c Jan 28, 2008
I would just like to throw out another point that nobody has mentioned yet. If you examine the majority of the sencences in chaper 14, they are mostly echoes of previous sentneces in the novel. The second paragraph beginning with "the eighteenth century has its distinction..." is repeated almost word-for-word back on page 53. The next paragraph beginning "listless is the air in an empty room..." is also found on page 27. And of course the call of "Jacob! Jacob!" is several other places throughtout the novel. TO me, Woolf does this to emphasize a major theme of her novel: just as we come to know Jacob not so much through firsthand experience, but through his echo on those around him, we too learn of Jacob death through an echo of previous snippets from the novel. The novel is called "Jacob's Room" and not just "Jacob" because Woolf wants us to know the people in Jacob's life and his surroundings in order to , not just through Jacob's own throughts, feelings, and actions. What do you think? - lma-c Jan 28, 2008
Question: Is Jacob really dead? I don't think so. The evidence is in his room. Everything is just the way he left it. If Jacob did die, I have the feeling it would have been a suicide. But everything is the same. Nothing is out of place, nothing abnormal. Furthermore, there is no suicide note. And, there is NOTHING MENTIONED ABOUT DEATH AT ALL. We are not given the slightest hint of death. No mention of a body, nothing. Jacob is gone, but not dead. I think that he just could not bear the fact that he was in love with a married woman and that his life has not had meaning and just ran away. Maybe he became a hermit. I don't know. But dead, no.- JHe-c Jan 28, 2008
Many of you are making comments based upon the way you read the novel. As Nick mentioned, his views about this chapter completely changed after he heard Br. Tom reading it. Br. Tom has read the book several times over, and I would probably trust his emphasis on words more than I would trust mine, but still, isn't that another part open to interpretation? I mean, if Bonamy were softly crying Jacob's name, that could possibly support John's theory about him having run away and perhaps being with a woman and not him. If we take crying to be that he is shouting Jacob's name in anguish, then it could possibly be that he has been in the war and has been shot, or has been killed by some other means. I don't really see much evidence for suicide, because I don't really know Jacob. I don't know if behavior is withdrawn, or if he's just being shy. I don't know if he's depressed. All we know is he's gone. But perhaps this is not as important as we are making it?
The more important thing is his room and his people. What surrounds him. The literature that surrounds his presence. About the repetition, Woolf could be saying that life overlaps, and that it is not linear. It is not just one singular life, but many lives interwoven in no particular way known to us, but to the creator. In this case Woolf. Maybe not even Woolf. I'm getting carried away with the abstract train here, but does any of it make sense to you? - KLe-c Jan 29, 2008
I hate to counter you, John, but the last time I checked there was actually some rather strong indications that he Jacob was dead. First off, the in the previous chapter, Mrs. Flanders mentioned that sons were fighting in the war. That definitely would include Jacob. Then, in chapter 14, it mentions the Ram's skull that would be over the door. That also could clearly be taken as an indicator of the death of someone within the house. These messages make it rather clear that Jacob is dead.
When Bonamy makes the comment about everything being just as he left it, he was in a state of disbelief that Jacob had actually thought he'd come back from the war. As we all know, World War I was a rather nasty war with the introduction of chemical warfare and the like, and was one big, bloody stalemate. In my mind, that's why Bonamy is in disbelief.
It is meant to be ironic that he left everything as it was, not to show that he disappeared because he was ashamed. He certainly doesn't have the moral fibre of Oedipus who would voluntarily walk away in shame at the horrible immorals he had committed. Remember, Jacob was an intellectual: mind over spirituality. He wouldn't think that he had to run away in shame because he loved a married woman. And I don't really think that he would consider his life to be meaningless. Though it would be funny to see him in a sequel as an Obi-wan Kenobi type figure as a hermit out in the desert, I don't think that that's really Jacob's personality.- NVa-c Jan 29, 2008
Yes, Jacob left his room exactly as it had been, but I agree with NVa. I find it hard to believe that he did it because he was ashamed. I think that Jacob believed that he would come back home after his duties were finished, which I think was foolish because he should have set his affairs in order before he went off to war. But what I want to know is, why does Woolf include this detail? Why is it so significant that Jacob left his room a mess or that he did not set his affairs in order?
It may just tell us more about Jacob's character: it might show his optimism because he thought that he would come back, or it might be a criticism of the nature of war because he was blown up or something. Does anybody else have more insight to this? - kkr-c Feb 1, 2008
I'm not entirely certain if I agree with the idea that Jacob left the room exactly the way it was because he was an optimist and thought he was coming back, KKr. I didn't really see any evidence that Jacob was an optimistic individual in the novel. To me, and this is just my opinion, but he came off more as an apaethetic and confused person than anything else. In the way he lived his life, constantly going through women and never really being certain as to what he wants to do with his life, I'm not really sure if he cared whether or not he came back from the war or not. He went off to war knowing that he would either die or come back to a life that was completely the same as it was before, so why bother to tidy up? I think leaving the room untidy and unkempt is completely characteristic of the fact that Jacob doesn't know what he wants in life and has absolutely no idea where he's going. - MRo-c Feb 1, 2008
MRo, I think you really have something there. Jacob knew as MRo stated that he would either die or come back to his "normal" life. So, if in his life he lived disorderly, why would he change it now? What could motivate him enough to change his way of life? His room was unkept exactly like his life. The book is called "Jacob's Room." His room is so much more than a simple place were he lays his head down at night. It is a part of him, but it is also a way that we can see into the true Jacob.
I think that it was essential that the end scene took place in Jacob's Room. I don't think another setting would have been appropriate. So, do you think that Woolf picked the best possible title for her book? Does the last chapter properly sum up Jacob as a character? - kva-c Feb 1, 2008
I agree with TRu on this one. The shoes definately are a deliberate and symbolic choice to represent the loss of Jacob. Like TRU said, it's like asking the question "who is going to fill Jacob's shoes now that he is gone." Who is going to fill the hole in their lives that is symbolized by the unfilled shoes. It's almost like their relationship was a shoe of sorts, and now that jacob is gone, they are but shells of what they used to be. I also want to say that I really like this scene and found it very powerful. There is nothing more erie or sorrowful than going through the unused and lonesome items of a dead person. Sometimes they are even very nice things, but you realize that it was the person who made those things so valuable. And now that they are gone, they seem pointless. Using abandoned items like this to reveal the death of Jacob was a wonderful choice to most accurately express the end of a short and tragic life. It gives you the feeling that Jacob, if only given more time, could have done more with those shoes, with his life.- MKo-c Feb 1, 2008
In the final line, Mrs. Flanders holds out an old pair of Jacob's shoes and asks what to do with them. I certainly hope that some time has past since they found out about his death, otherwise that would make her an extremely callous individual. Bonamy seems to be more upset than Jacob's own mother. That doesn't make sense to me because I always thought that Mrs. Flanders really cared about Jacob, despite the fact that Archer was the absolute favorite. I found that part of the ending to be rather dissatisfying.
Does anyone have further thoughts on the ending of the book? Did you like the ending or not?-
Actually, I thought the last line was rather poignant. I think that you took the word "exclamation" to mean that she was surprised or amused. Maybe the exclamation was more of despair, the text does not really say. Nevertheless, I think the significance of her statement, "What am I to do with these, Mr. Bonamy?" (138) was more of a symbolic qestion. The question is more one of "How are we going to cope with him being gone?" That is, "How are we going to fill his shoes now?" He was a significant part of both of their lives, and they both loved him. But for Bonamy, the pain is a little more exposed. Mrs. Flanders has already learned to cope without him.
Remember the passage at the beginning of Chapter 8: "...and come back, come back, come back to me." She has had to cope with him neglecting her for years. Now that he is dead, she will have him neglect her permanently. But at the same time, nobody else has him either. We know that "the heart was torn by the little creak, the sudden stir." (70). If she is less upset than Bonamy, it would only be because those women that stole him away can't have him anymore. But I am not even sure the book says that. -
I'm caught in the middle with this one. When I first read chapter 14, I had the same initial reaction as NVa. I thought that is seemed like Mrs. Flanders didn't care about the death of her son like Mr. Bonamy did. I was a little frustrated with her. Like NVa said, Archer did seem to be the obvious favorite of Mrs. Flanders but I expected a little bit more emotion from her over the death of Jacob.
I read this chapter over a couple of times and after a while I realized that Mrs. Flanders was upset, but like TRu pointed out, Jacob wasn't always there for Mrs. Flanders. So once she learned of his death, while it was probably upsetting for her, it's not like they had the best relationship. I think that she felt guilty about his death because now there was no way to repair what was left of their relationship. It didn't seem like she was sad but I think that she just had a different sadness than that of Mr. Bonamy. -
Might I add my belief that Betty Flanders loved Jacob fully as much as any mother ever loved a son? Yes, she probably would have had feelings about the women Jacob knew, but he was still her son ... come back to me, come back to me, come back to me ... I kind of agree with Tim in that it seems she's showing a bit of the very British stiff upper lip at this moment. She has dealt with the immediate shock .. and now it's time to deal with setting things in order again. -
After listening to Brother Tom's reading of this chapter on the podcast, I got a more solid understanding of what was going on. It made more clear the despair of his death, especially with the crying out of Jacob and the manner in which he read Mrs. Flanders's statements.
There were some other symbolic things I heard more clearly after listening to it. First, I became more aware of the part with the ram's skull. Is that supposed to be related the jawless sheep's skull in Chapter 1? That reference kind of brings the book full circle if they are indeed connected. The other thing I noticed more was the word "omnibuses." That word was used a lot over the course of the book. Why were the omnibuses so important that they were even included in the conclusion? Any thoughts?-
I agree with TRu in that when I read this last chapter, the final line really stuck out for me. It is a rather bizarre end, but the whole book is rather strange, and I suppose it would only be fitting. Chapter 14 has an air of vagueness mixed with significance; Bonamy and Mrs. Flanders are dealing with their pain in different ways, and each action in this chapter speaks loudly. Woolf did not waste any words in this chapter, and each part holds an important aspect of the ending. For instance, their is an obscurity in Bonamy's response; he treats it as if Jacob has disappeared. He comments on how Jacob had left without getting his affairs in order, and he calls out the window as if he still believes he's out there somewhere. Then the narrator comes in, talking about Jacob's room and the empty, awkwardness of it now that Jacob is no longer occupying it. I did not get the feeling that Mrs. Flanders didn't feel upset about her son's death or disappearance; it seemed like she was just accepting that it was over. Long ago she accepted her lack of influence in his life and now she is finally giving up trying to get him back; she's realized that all is gone. -
I thought that the ending of this novel was quite interesting as well. I didn't expect the last chapter to be so short, nor to examine the contents of what was Jacob's room. I agree that it sounded as if Bonamy had very little expression about Jacob's death, and when he did show a bit of emotion, it was, as dru said... as if he disappeared. We, again, are confronted with the idea of someone softly yelling crying out for Jacob with the lonesome attitude. It adds a sad note to the end of the book, but much more than sad. It makes it sounds as though the characters are drowning in grief and sorrow for the loss of a young man whom everyone seemed to get along with. I also thought that the last couple sentences about Jacob's shoes were odd. I think that it would have been much more theatrical and meaningful to end the novel with Bonamy screaming out the window for Jacob and Mrs. Flanders exclaiming how confusing everything is. Any thoughts? -
I would just like to throw out another point that nobody has mentioned yet. If you examine the majority of the sencences in chaper 14, they are mostly echoes of previous sentneces in the novel. The second paragraph beginning with "the eighteenth century has its distinction..." is repeated almost word-for-word back on page 53. The next paragraph beginning "listless is the air in an empty room..." is also found on page 27. And of course the call of "Jacob! Jacob!" is several other places throughtout the novel. TO me, Woolf does this to emphasize a major theme of her novel: just as we come to know Jacob not so much through firsthand experience, but through his echo on those around him, we too learn of Jacob death through an echo of previous snippets from the novel. The novel is called "Jacob's Room" and not just "Jacob" because Woolf wants us to know the people in Jacob's life and his surroundings in order to , not just through Jacob's own throughts, feelings, and actions. What do you think?
-
Question: Is Jacob really dead? I don't think so. The evidence is in his room. Everything is just the way he left it. If Jacob did die, I have the feeling it would have been a suicide. But everything is the same. Nothing is out of place, nothing abnormal. Furthermore, there is no suicide note. And, there is NOTHING MENTIONED ABOUT DEATH AT ALL. We are not given the slightest hint of death. No mention of a body, nothing. Jacob is gone, but not dead. I think that he just could not bear the fact that he was in love with a married woman and that his life has not had meaning and just ran away. Maybe he became a hermit. I don't know. But dead, no.-
Many of you are making comments based upon the way you read the novel. As Nick mentioned, his views about this chapter completely changed after he heard Br. Tom reading it. Br. Tom has read the book several times over, and I would probably trust his emphasis on words more than I would trust mine, but still, isn't that another part open to interpretation? I mean, if Bonamy were softly crying Jacob's name, that could possibly support John's theory about him having run away and perhaps being with a woman and not him. If we take crying to be that he is shouting Jacob's name in anguish, then it could possibly be that he has been in the war and has been shot, or has been killed by some other means. I don't really see much evidence for suicide, because I don't really know Jacob. I don't know if behavior is withdrawn, or if he's just being shy. I don't know if he's depressed. All we know is he's gone. But perhaps this is not as important as we are making it?
The more important thing is his room and his people. What surrounds him. The literature that surrounds his presence. About the repetition, Woolf could be saying that life overlaps, and that it is not linear. It is not just one singular life, but many lives interwoven in no particular way known to us, but to the creator. In this case Woolf. Maybe not even Woolf. I'm getting carried away with the abstract train here, but does any of it make sense to you? -
I hate to counter you, John, but the last time I checked there was actually some rather strong indications that he Jacob was dead. First off, the in the previous chapter, Mrs. Flanders mentioned that sons were fighting in the war. That definitely would include Jacob. Then, in chapter 14, it mentions the Ram's skull that would be over the door. That also could clearly be taken as an indicator of the death of someone within the house. These messages make it rather clear that Jacob is dead.
When Bonamy makes the comment about everything being just as he left it, he was in a state of disbelief that Jacob had actually thought he'd come back from the war. As we all know, World War I was a rather nasty war with the introduction of chemical warfare and the like, and was one big, bloody stalemate. In my mind, that's why Bonamy is in disbelief.
It is meant to be ironic that he left everything as it was, not to show that he disappeared because he was ashamed. He certainly doesn't have the moral fibre of Oedipus who would voluntarily walk away in shame at the horrible immorals he had committed. Remember, Jacob was an intellectual: mind over spirituality. He wouldn't think that he had to run away in shame because he loved a married woman. And I don't really think that he would consider his life to be meaningless. Though it would be funny to see him in a sequel as an Obi-wan Kenobi type figure as a hermit out in the desert, I don't think that that's really Jacob's personality.-
Yes, Jacob left his room exactly as it had been, but I agree with NVa. I find it hard to believe that he did it because he was ashamed. I think that Jacob believed that he would come back home after his duties were finished, which I think was foolish because he should have set his affairs in order before he went off to war. But what I want to know is, why does Woolf include this detail? Why is it so significant that Jacob left his room a mess or that he did not set his affairs in order?
It may just tell us more about Jacob's character: it might show his optimism because he thought that he would come back, or it might be a criticism of the nature of war because he was blown up or something. Does anybody else have more insight to this? -
I'm not entirely certain if I agree with the idea that Jacob left the room exactly the way it was because he was an optimist and thought he was coming back, KKr. I didn't really see any evidence that Jacob was an optimistic individual in the novel. To me, and this is just my opinion, but he came off more as an apaethetic and confused person than anything else. In the way he lived his life, constantly going through women and never really being certain as to what he wants to do with his life, I'm not really sure if he cared whether or not he came back from the war or not. He went off to war knowing that he would either die or come back to a life that was completely the same as it was before, so why bother to tidy up? I think leaving the room untidy and unkempt is completely characteristic of the fact that Jacob doesn't know what he wants in life and has absolutely no idea where he's going.
-
MRo, I think you really have something there. Jacob knew as MRo stated that he would either die or come back to his "normal" life. So, if in his life he lived disorderly, why would he change it now? What could motivate him enough to change his way of life? His room was unkept exactly like his life. The book is called "Jacob's Room." His room is so much more than a simple place were he lays his head down at night. It is a part of him, but it is also a way that we can see into the true Jacob.
I think that it was essential that the end scene took place in Jacob's Room. I don't think another setting would have been appropriate. So, do you think that Woolf picked the best possible title for her book? Does the last chapter properly sum up Jacob as a character?
-
I agree with TRu on this one. The shoes definately are a deliberate and symbolic choice to represent the loss of Jacob. Like TRU said, it's like asking the question "who is going to fill Jacob's shoes now that he is gone." Who is going to fill the hole in their lives that is symbolized by the unfilled shoes. It's almost like their relationship was a shoe of sorts, and now that jacob is gone, they are but shells of what they used to be. I also want to say that I really like this scene and found it very powerful. There is nothing more erie or sorrowful than going through the unused and lonesome items of a dead person. Sometimes they are even very nice things, but you realize that it was the person who made those things so valuable. And now that they are gone, they seem pointless. Using abandoned items like this to reveal the death of Jacob was a wonderful choice to most accurately express the end of a short and tragic life. It gives you the feeling that Jacob, if only given more time, could have done more with those shoes, with his life.-